ETZ 4(WR) IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL (SCOTLAND) Judgment of the Tribunal in Case No: 4101843/2023 Heard at Edinburgh on the Cloud Based Video Platform on th of May 2023 with Deliberation on the th of June 2023 Employment Judge J G d’Inverno Mr D Patullo st Named v Advance International Ltd — 2022

Mr D Patullo and Mr S Digan brought claims against Advance Group UK Ltd arising from work carried out between 27 September 2022 and 8 November 2022. The tribunal found that the parties were dealing on a subcontracting basis and that the evidence did not establish any agreement that the claimants would be paid £30 per hour. It found instead that the contemporaneous discussions and email evidence supported an understanding that the rate would be around £17 per hour, with a separate £220 per day arrangement later agreed for Lockerbie work. The tribunal also found that Brian Patullo, who had relayed information between the parties, was not acting as an agent for either side.

The tribunal dismissed the separate allegation that the claimants had not been paid for certain hours worked. It held that the claimants had not discharged the burden of proof because their schedules were prepared after the event, were inconsistent with the respondent’s records, and were not supported by source documentary evidence. The oral evidence identifying unpaid hours was said to be too general to support findings of fact on specific unpaid periods.

In discussion, the tribunal noted a potential jurisdiction issue because the evidence did not establish an employee or worker relationship and the parties appeared to be in a contractor/subcontractor relationship. It did not need to determine that issue finally, because on the facts the claims failed in any event and were dismissed. No monetary award was made.